In Search of 'Neutral' Arbitration Centers, Russian Dispute Cases Move to Asia and the Middle East
Hong Kong and Dubai have seen an influx of Russian dispute cases as the West continues to impose sanctions.
November 12, 2024 at 09:21 PM
4 minute read
Hong Kong and Dubai have seen an influx of Russian dispute cases following the onset of the war in Ukraine.
Ever since countries in the West imposed sanctions on Russia following the invasion of Ukraine, the two financial centers have become the preferred arbitration jurisdictions for Russian parties in disputes.
Many Russians no longer perceive other popular arbitration jurisdictions in the U.S., the U.K., and Europe to be neutral, lawyers say.
In 2023, Russia was the seventh most popular country of origin among all dispute parties at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Center (HKIAC). A year earlier, it didn’t even make the center’s top-10 list.
“In recent years, we observed what has been labeled as a 'turn to the East' among Russian clients,” said Denis Almakaev, a partner and head of international disputes at LEVEL Legal Services, a Russia-based law firm established in 2022 by former Hogan Lovells partners after Hogan Lovells shuttered its Moscow office following the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
“Russian companies are increasingly choosing Hong Kong, Singapore and Dubai, partly due to the perceived neutrality of these jurisdictions,” Almakaev said.
Favorable arbitration law, a strong pro-arbitration judiciary, and convenience of travel are also key factors in driving dispute cases to these jurisdictions, he added.
In 2023, Russia-related cases accounted for HK$18 billion (US$2.3 billion)—19% of the total amount the HKIAC saw last year. The increased caseload also coincides with increased trade between Hong Kong and Russia.
Since the onset of the war in Ukraine, Russian or sanction-related work in Hong Kong has at least doubled, said Dantes Leung, a partner at Hong Kong independent law firm Oldham, Li & Nie, during a panel discussion at Hong Kong Arbitration Week in October.
Similarly, Dubai has emerged as a popular destination for Russia-related disputes due to its perceived neutrality. According to a poll conducted by the Russian law firm LEVEL Legal Services, Russian clients in Moscow, when asked which jurisdiction they believe to be the most neutral, ranked the UAE and Dubai as top contenders.
The UAE has yet to place sanctions on Russia despite pressure from the West. In May, Hamad Buamim, chair of the Dubai Multi Commodities Centre, a leading United Arab Emirates free trade zone, said that Russian sanctions have been ineffective in stifling trade.
Finding Neutral Arbitrators
While Hong Kong and Dubai have become popular destinations for Russia-related disputes, lawyers say it is still a challenge to find neutral arbitrators, as they can be constrained by their home country’s regulations, the legal community, and political leanings.
“Sanctions are pretty new to arbitration but the usual mechanism still exists,” Leung said.
Parties can include a clause in a contract that says no arbitrator should be appointed from countries or jurisdictions that impose any kind of sanctions on any of their policies, he said.
Even if not legally prevented from acting in a Russia-related dispute, many arbitrators coming from jurisdictions that have imposed sanctions are still reluctant to take on Russian dispute cases for fear of professional repercussions back home, said Ali Al Zarouni, managing partner of the Dubai-headquartered law firm Horizons & Co.
The Use of Injunctions in Sanctions Disputes
Meanwhile, Russian parties to a dispute, fearing they may not get fair treatment in certain jurisdictions, have also been using injunction measures that exist in international dispute resolution to prevent arbitration from going forward in a foreign jurisdiction, lawyers say.
“So oftentimes, even though the parties have agreed to an arbitration clause, the Russian party, thinking that he may not get fair treatment in the arbitration, may prefer to have a dispute resolved by litigation in Russia,” Leung said.
Often that doesn’t sit well with the other party in the dispute.
Leung said that sanctions, geopolitics, and the difficulty of finding neutral legal representation have complicated Russia-related cases, creating novel challenges for international disputes lawyers
"They are navigating new territory," he said.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHSF Locks In Its American Dream. But What Will a U.S. Merger Mean For its Asia Practice?
FCA Fines Metro Bank £16.7M Over ‘Financial Crime Failings’
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-58
- 2Sweet James Clinches $17.4M Personal Injury Jury Verdict in California's Kings County
- 3In Lame-Duck Session, US Senate Confirms Illinois Federal Judge on Bipartisan Vote
- 4Gordon Rees Opens 80th Office, ‘Collaboration Hub’ in Palo Alto
- 5The White Stripes Drop Copyright Claim Against Trump Campaign
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250